Skip to main content

Week 5 Questions by Rajorshi

Both Giroux and Kiang are critical of the corporatization of the university. 

1. Kiang’s piece triggered memories that I thought I had dumped in a closet. While I appreciate his approach, he ends up centering himself so that the focus is largely on what he did right. In that context, how should educators write about pedagogy? Since teachers also end up in administrative roles, does that indicate the university’s attempt to make them more docile? While I have a lot of problems with how the Netflix series, The Chair centers the white male professor as a victim, I felt that it engages with the difficulties of being a POC tenured professor who ends up in an administrative role. Also, given the recent John Comaroff case, can we think of these hierarchies as a form of academic kinship or a kind of orientation (as Sara Ahmed theorizes) that a university employee must conform to?

2. Giroux writes – “But to acknowledge the latter, as Alan O’ Shea has recently pointed out, does not legitimate the presupposition that power is entirely on the side of domination within schools, that teachers and students can only be complicitous with hegemonic power, however, they challenge its structures, ideologies, and practices” (350).

How can this argument (about reproduction theory?) engage with the critique of the school system and research emerging out of Native American studies? Can't one imagine education outside schools?

I am also keen to understand how the concept of “public pedagogy” is different from a kind of pedagogy, such as abolitionist teaching that is informed by critical race theory. Is there any difference as such? An example of how cultural politics is pedagogical can perhaps be helpful.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

2/2 Discussion Questions

Althusser makes a point that ISAs operate as "unified" under the ruling ideology. To what extent are certain ISAs unified if they are "the site of class struggle" playing out, holding the potential for "ruptures" (to use Hall's phrase) with dominant ideologies? Here, I am thinking about the University of Iowa's COVID policies and how its rules are practiced and applied in many different ways throughout campus, as administrative burdens and scale make it difficult to oversee large numbers of employees. More generally, as junior scholars, grad students, and/or individuals doing cultural studies work, does it make more sense for us to do deep and nuanced readings of theorists such as Marx and Althusser in our work, or to cite others who have expanded these traditions over the years?

Week 6 Discussion Qs

 Hall brings up the concept of interpellation as applied to social formations. (p 335) How is interpellation related to articulation? How are the two different, if at all? Must the two be discussed together? I have more difficulty conceptualizing interpellation than I do articulation. If we are to take up Hall's warning not to study racism as a set of "historically specific racisms" (336) nor as something with a "universal structure" (337). What balance can we strike today between these two approaches in our current historical moment? Eduardo Bonilla-Silva has written that certain forms of modern racism have been impacted by the prevalent ideology of "colorblindness." Are we still in this moment or are new specificities arising?